Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

People v. Van Mai

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 31, 1994No. G012217PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

accomplice during a robbery gone awry, Dung Van Mai complains of the trial court’s failure to modify CALJIC No. 8.12, challenges the constitutionality of CALJIC No. 2.90, and attacks the sufficiency of the evidence to support one of four convictions for attempted robbery. We agree CALJIC No. 8.12 is deficient in several respects and the court should have modified it as requested by the defense. But, finding no prejudice or other error, we affirm.

I

Posing as customers, Mai and Bao Lau browsed in 62-year-old Li Thi Nguyen’s fabric store for approximately 15 minutes. Then Mai grabbed…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  2. People v. WashingtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  3. People v. JenningsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  4. People v. GilbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  5. People v. AntickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. People v. SanchezCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  2. People v. GonzalezCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  3. People v. SlaughterCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  4. People v. CervantesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  5. People v. MejiaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API